gets off the medium digitally. Unencoded. See where I'm going? The only way around this would be some kind of fancy analog cryptography. Yeah, right. Quality loss deluxe, I'd say.
Let it come. Then let's crack it, rev-engineer it and send both results back to the RIAA.
Basically it's a mixture of a proprietary RPC system, shared disk/memory/whatsoever access and pay-per-view software, all under the disguise of an open standard. It's their way to counter the recent XML hype. (I still haven't figured out what XML really is... Is it worth knowing?)
OEM's will be more than happy over this because now they can advertise stuff like "Comes with 2 million software packages" while just putting a single disc into the box.
A CDR, perhaps with a fancy label that flies off in the 250x DVD drive, causing the OEM an overall cost of 10 bucks per dozen.
Filled with frickin' 0.5Meg installers! Now that would be a bad surprise, wouldn't it? And not only would the $oftware companies not be mad about it, they would welcome it. Why? Because they don't have to print manuals (outdated every 2 weeks anyway) or press any discs anymore.
I know there's a lot of good which could come from it. Like more regular, smaller, updates which bring better security and reliability, better support and so on. But the dark side is quicker and more attractive. I'd hate it to be helped no more by that happy paperclip (which I could still strangle after not having seen it for about two years) but by the happy software salesman; "Don't like this feature? Problems using it? Think about using AdWord instead!" Thank you so much.
Privacy will probably go down the drain even further because now they know that you're using their software. They know your credit card number. One word for that: fraud. I don't necessarily mean that Micro$oft will become even richer by performing a nightraid, emptying all their users' accounts, but instead someone could use freshly patched backdoors to link up your data against other databases. Think about it.
Last thing I want to mention is: when I pay for software, I don't want to have crippled nagware that's calling "Pay Me" every month. I paid for it, I want to use it. And if I like to use it on my laptop and my desktop, that's frickin' up to me. I don't have to pay twice even if some big $chmock company tells me so.
I must say that I never read the book (neither one) and also didn't see the first movie (however, I know some parts of the plot). When not seen as a sequel, the Movie actually manages to stick out of the "Crap made in Hollywood" crowd that cropped up for the last two years.
I agree with the above when it comes to the part of Clarice. Se is a Scully rip-off, but at least she's good at that. Hannibal however ist a great character, and this is conveyed to the audience every minute of the movie. Each and every thing he does seems - as twisted as it might seem first - logical and fits into his character.
One of the best things about the whole thing is the use of special effects. There are no purple blood fountains like in other thrillers/shockers, they don't try to catch Mr. Lecter with some truly-amazing-state-of-the-art FBI supersecretweapon, but instead it's all about the story that inevitably draws towards a surprising (but not totally unpredictable) end.
About the rating: here in germany (yeah, I know that I most likely didn't get half of the depth due to the "localisation-layer"), the movie is actually rated 18+ because That Guy Is Eating Human Flesh!!! Not because of some rather cruel scenes, because of which it was originally meant to be given a 16+ rating.
What I found a little disappointing is the failure of the movie to actually keep up the suspense over the whole two hours. It's definitely got its lengths during which a short nap doesn't mean you won't get the rest of it. But afterall, it's a far above average film for anyone who doesn't mind some fake blood and well-acted acts of violence.
However, I think that browser makers could need a good, hard kick in the groin as a big "no, you cannot set standards". Their browsers are broken. Why? Because, in order to enforce vendor specific $#17, they break perfectly working stuff.
There's no easy solution to this since you cannot prohibit anyone making dud browsers. What is needed is a public awareness of things, and you must not hope that any AOL guy does understand anything beyond "click here to view pr0n". (No offence meant, someone had to take it.)
When starting off with the first book of the Belgariad, I also thought his style was pretty naïve, but I changed my opinion. It's just somewhat different. Tolkien is pretty much serious about his characters and the epic he recounts while Eddings never seems to take it all too serious. This might be because they have different time contexts. The character development is something I really like about Eddings. Reading his books is like reading a transcript of some freaky, large-scale pen-and-paper roleplay campaign, something Tolkien probably never had a possibility to experience.
Afer all, don't misunderstand me. I never wanted to say Tolkien did just waste a bunch of paper. His books are still the foundation on "modern" fantasy. It's just a matter of personal preference.
BTW, I lost about a week's woth of sleep on the first 4 books. I never dared reading LOtR in bed because of fearing missing some important part of the story. I always read during the afternoon while I was still fully awake.
Quote: I didn't know, but it's a trilogy! Three movies, each to be released at Christmas a year apart. The Fellowship of the Ring 2001, The Two Towers 2002, The Return of the King 2003.
And most probably the best thing is that all three movies are about done and could be released at once. But... well, I just started reading Eddings' Belgariad and it's probably going to be a long time until I finally get back to Tolkien. After all, his work didn't have that enormous immersive effect I'm experiencing now.
I come to think Tolkien isn't the best fantasy author around and the movie isn't going to improve that. (TrollTrollTroll) To be honest, I'm thinking about not seeing it. The books are great and leave a lot of things to the reader's imagination; I wouldn't want to lose what I made up when I read it (german translation and english - it is a big difference!).
(*): I made it there after several experiments with blocksize and stuff. Don't ask me about the settings.
(**): encoded using LAME, VBR at highest quality. Average bitrate at about 230.
This makes me think that bzip might actually not be the best compressor available, but for lossless compression it surely is about the best solution.
SecuROM: broken
DiscSafe: broken
Thousands of other CD-CC mechanisms: broken
"Secure" ATA: pending
Exact status of projects marked pending:
"Secure" ATA: Time to release: t, Time to breach: 0.5t
Note: This one should prove easy since we can write on the media directly.
What I want to say is the following: It might be a nice try, but larger HD's and software one's willing to pay for should be higher on the priority list. BTW, I have the f***ing right to make copies for personal use and I'll regard any license agreement stating otherwise as void since it'd keep my from protecting my very own possessions. Thus, such a mechanism would violate some of my more basic rights just as CC on CD's does.
You should have a look at the Jargon Dictionary. It explains some of the widely used acros, at least those from the IT sector.
A copy can be found at
http://www.netmeg.net/jargon.
Uhmmm... no? Why do I see a BIG problem here? What would you do? Introduce som 6 hour slack at the end of the year? Making new years eve last 30 hous? Hell, I couldn't stand having days being "right" only once in four years!
I had to delete the files due to transfer quota restrictions... exceeding these is quite expensive. Use the official mirrors (a message telling you where to find those can be found by restricting message view to score 5). I hope you all had a good download... *g*
(Amiga's operating system is real-time and thus quite fast)
Is there anyone else here who doesn't quite agree with that? I think cannot be said like this. Real time means that the given system guarantees a maximum response time to an input. It doesn't say anything about the overall performance. My multimeter is pretty much realtime, but I wouldn't dare playing quake on it. I don't want to say anything bad about the Amiga or any other platform, I just think that this should be corrected.
Judge 1: You heard about that BT patent thingy? Judge 2: Uhm... you aren't talking about the hyperlink stuff, are you? J 1:Yes, I am. I think we should give them the right to enforce that patent. (Some seconds of dead silence)
(Both judges bursting in laughter) J 2: Man, that was a GOOD one! You almost had me! J 1: That one is great, isn't it? I had the whole pub laughing last weekend!
As for me, BT can stick their fingers up where the sun don't shine (or does it at these people? At least, there's not too much to block it.) and play rotating chair until the men with the straitjackets come up!
Slashdot Mirror
Let it come. Then let's crack it, rev-engineer it and send both results back to the RIAA.
Speak after me: Who created it? XEROX!
A CDR, perhaps with a fancy label that flies off in the 250x DVD drive, causing the OEM an overall cost of 10 bucks per dozen.
Filled with frickin' 0.5Meg installers! Now that would be a bad surprise, wouldn't it? And not only would the $oftware companies not be mad about it, they would welcome it. Why? Because they don't have to print manuals (outdated every 2 weeks anyway) or press any discs anymore.
Privacy will probably go down the drain even further because now they know that you're using their software. They know your credit card number. One word for that: fraud. I don't necessarily mean that Micro$oft will become even richer by performing a nightraid, emptying all their users' accounts, but instead someone could use freshly patched backdoors to link up your data against other databases. Think about it.
Last thing I want to mention is: when I pay for software, I don't want to have crippled nagware that's calling "Pay Me" every month. I paid for it, I want to use it. And if I like to use it on my laptop and my desktop, that's frickin' up to me. I don't have to pay twice even if some big $chmock company tells me so.
I agree with the above when it comes to the part of Clarice. Se is a Scully rip-off, but at least she's good at that. Hannibal however ist a great character, and this is conveyed to the audience every minute of the movie. Each and every thing he does seems - as twisted as it might seem first - logical and fits into his character.
One of the best things about the whole thing is the use of special effects. There are no purple blood fountains like in other thrillers/shockers, they don't try to catch Mr. Lecter with some truly-amazing-state-of-the-art FBI supersecretweapon, but instead it's all about the story that inevitably draws towards a surprising (but not totally unpredictable) end.
About the rating: here in germany (yeah, I know that I most likely didn't get half of the depth due to the "localisation-layer"), the movie is actually rated 18+ because That Guy Is Eating Human Flesh!!! Not because of some rather cruel scenes, because of which it was originally meant to be given a 16+ rating.
What I found a little disappointing is the failure of the movie to actually keep up the suspense over the whole two hours. It's definitely got its lengths during which a short nap doesn't mean you won't get the rest of it. But afterall, it's a far above average film for anyone who doesn't mind some fake blood and well-acted acts of violence.
While Java is a big, clunky piece of doo, JScript is a big, clunky piece of doo. Oooops. Perhaps it is the same afterall.
However, I think that browser makers could need a good, hard kick in the groin as a big "no, you cannot set standards". Their browsers are broken. Why? Because, in order to enforce vendor specific $#17, they break perfectly working stuff.
There's no easy solution to this since you cannot prohibit anyone making dud browsers. What is needed is a public awareness of things, and you must not hope that any AOL guy does understand anything beyond "click here to view pr0n". (No offence meant, someone had to take it.)
Writers' Block.
... is a hit, isn't it?!?! I mean, if you nearly miss something... don't you hit it?
;-)
Uhm... sorry, but I can't quite follow you. Are you talking about putting a big, fat rock into your trajectory? ;-)
The CNN site offers only a way to the movie which pretty much hides the URL. Here it is:v iew/near.mov
http://www.cnn.com/2001/TECH/space/02/09/near.pre
I think it's a rather good but information free teaser well worth the 2Meg download.
<body>
<font size="+2">
[Page Here]
</font>
</body>
</html>
Somewhere on the MIT page, it says that a 1F, 10kV capacity would be about car-size.
Only if you accelerate the projectile to speeds high enough to ionize the surrounding air.
Afer all, don't misunderstand me. I never wanted to say Tolkien did just waste a bunch of paper. His books are still the foundation on "modern" fantasy. It's just a matter of personal preference.
BTW, I lost about a week's woth of sleep on the first 4 books. I never dared reading LOtR in bed because of fearing missing some important part of the story. I always read during the afternoon while I was still fully awake.
And most probably the best thing is that all three movies are about done and could be released at once. But... well, I just started reading Eddings' Belgariad and it's probably going to be a long time until I finally get back to Tolkien. After all, his work didn't have that enormous immersive effect I'm experiencing now.
I come to think Tolkien isn't the best fantasy author around and the movie isn't going to improve that. (TrollTrollTroll) To be honest, I'm thinking about not seeing it. The books are great and leave a lot of things to the reader's imagination; I wouldn't want to lose what I made up when I read it (german translation and english - it is a big difference!).
Original file: approx. 24MB
bzip'ed file(*): approx 17MB
MP3 file(**): approx 5.5MB
(*): I made it there after several experiments with blocksize and stuff. Don't ask me about the settings.
(**): encoded using LAME, VBR at highest quality. Average bitrate at about 230.
This makes me think that bzip might actually not be the best compressor available, but for lossless compression it surely is about the best solution.
DiscSafe: broken
Thousands of other CD-CC mechanisms: broken
"Secure" ATA: pending
Exact status of projects marked pending:
"Secure" ATA: Time to release: t, Time to breach: 0.5t
Note: This one should prove easy since we can write on the media directly.
What I want to say is the following: It might be a nice try, but larger HD's and software one's willing to pay for should be higher on the priority list. BTW, I have the f***ing right to make copies for personal use and I'll regard any license agreement stating otherwise as void since it'd keep my from protecting my very own possessions. Thus, such a mechanism would violate some of my more basic rights just as CC on CD's does.
You should have a look at the Jargon Dictionary. It explains some of the widely used acros, at least those from the IT sector.
A copy can be found at http://www.netmeg.net/jargon.
Uhmmm... no? Why do I see a BIG problem here? What would you do? Introduce som 6 hour slack at the end of the year? Making new years eve last 30 hous? Hell, I couldn't stand having days being "right" only once in four years!
I had to delete the files due to transfer quota restrictions... exceeding these is quite expensive. Use the official mirrors (a message telling you where to find those can be found by restricting message view to score 5). I hope you all had a good download... *g*
infocom-paper.pdf
infocom-presentation.pdf
I just hope that doesn't push me over my quota... *g*
(Amiga's operating system is real-time and thus quite fast)
Is there anyone else here who doesn't quite agree with that? I think cannot be said like this. Real time means that the given system guarantees a maximum response time to an input. It doesn't say anything about the overall performance. My multimeter is pretty much realtime, but I wouldn't dare playing quake on it. I don't want to say anything bad about the Amiga or any other platform, I just think that this should be corrected.
Judge 1: You heard about that BT patent thingy?
Judge 2: Uhm... you aren't talking about the hyperlink stuff, are you?
J 1:Yes, I am. I think we should give them the right to enforce that patent.
(Some seconds of dead silence)
(Both judges bursting in laughter)
J 2: Man, that was a GOOD one! You almost had me!
J 1: That one is great, isn't it? I had the whole pub laughing last weekend!
As for me, BT can stick their fingers up where the sun don't shine (or does it at these people? At least, there's not too much to block it.) and play rotating chair until the men with the straitjackets come up!
... that we actually need someone to bring that case to court. There's no punishment without prosecution.